Pages

Thursday, September 26, 2013

From VIC: Victoria University of Wellington Library (New Zealand) is pleased to announce that the Dan Long Union Library Poster Collection and the Therese O’Connell Poster Collection are now online, complete with digital images of almost all the posters. To browse the collections, please follow the hyperlinks given above and then the various links on the webpages. To search for particular items, click the “Find” button near the top of the screen and select the appropriate fields (to search for names, select “Scope and Contents” and “Index terms”). The large digital images can be viewed by going to the individual poster records and then clicking on the thumbnails.

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

“‘God’s Own Country’ is not safe from the vagaries of the person who believes in the bomb as opposed to argument,” bellowed the November 1907 Marlborough Express in response to a Wellington gathering of socialists and anarchists.[i]

The group, which included the Latvian-born Jewish tailor Philip Josephs, had come together to mark the execution of the Haymarket anarchists—an occasion remembered simultaneously across the world. This event, as well as betraying the typical (and long-lasting) flouting of the anarchist-cum-bomber stereotype by the capitalist media, illustrates two key points: the existence of an nascent anarchist movement in New Zealand, and its rootedness in a wider, transnational milieu.

Yet despite the existence of anarchists and anarchist ideas in New Zealand around the turn of the twentieth century, early anarchism has been relatively neglected. Indeed, the most substantial work to date on anarchism in New Zealand during the twentieth century’s turbulent teens is the indispensable thirty-two-page pamphlet, ‘Troublemakers’ Anarchism and Syndicalism: The Early Years of the Libertarian Movement in Aotearoa/New Zealand, by Frank Prebble. The result of this collective omission is that the roots of our current anarchist movement are both obscured and forgotten.

Ignoring the early anarchist movement in New Zealand also gives weight to the traditional Labourist narrative that radical, direct action politics at the point of production was not enough to bring about socialism, and therefore the site of socialist struggle shifted from the workplace to the benches of parliament. Anarchist tactics are seen to be found wanting, and everything prior to the 1935 Labour government’s parliamentary election is simply its “pre-history.”[ii]

However, as Sewing Freedom: Philip Josephs, Transnationalism & Early New Zealand Anarchism (AK Press, 2013) shows, anarchism in New Zealand has a legacy that can date back to 1904, if not earlier, thanks to the personal perseverance of Philip Josephs and others like him. Anarchists were a valid part of the wider labour movement, imparting uncredited ideas, tactics, and influence. Likewise, anarchist agitation and the circulation of radical literature contributed significantly to the development of a working class counter-culture in New Zealand, and the syndicalist upsurge of the ‘Red’ Federation of Labor (FOL) era (as well as the syndicalist movements during the First World War and after).

This far-from-Labourist line—struggles throughout New Zealand’s history that have aimed to go beyond the limitations of state forms—can be traced from anarchists like Josephs and the upsurge of anti-parliamentary politics. Its early development was fragmented—typified by the decentralised activity of various anarchists placed in their immediate socialist milieu—but existed nonetheless, giving birth to both New Zealand’s first anarchist collectives in 1913, and “dissent from the [Labourist] consensus before, during, and after the [1913 Great] strike.”[iii] Despite the claim otherwise, reformism during the twentieth century has been challenged by New Zealand anarchism, albeit as a minority movement.

It is hard to squeeze Sewing Freedom’s evidence of such claims into one small article. I say this not as a crude attempt to promote buying my book, but because the activities of Josephs and other early anarchists across New Zealand—Dr Thomas Fauset Macdonald, Fay McMasters, Carl Mumme, Len Wilson, Wyatt Jones, Syd Kingsford, J Sweeney, Lola Ridge—were surprising rich in depth and detail. Their involvement in organisations like the New Zealand Socialist Party and the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW); the trade union and anti-militarist movements; and all the strikes, struggles and radical cultural work these encompassed, deserves full appreciation.

Take the actions of Fay McMasters, for example. It is common knowledge (in labour history circles at least) that the building of the Otira Tunnel on the West Coast of the South Island was fraught with struggles between workers and management. Wildcat strikes, equally decried by bosses and union ‘leaders’, were a re-occurring form of direct action on the job. Yet what is not commonly known (or not seen as connected) was the presence of self-described anarchist communist, Fay McMasters. A former soldier of the ‘Black Watch’ with experience in giving popular lectures, McMasters would soapbox “in the evenings from 9 to 10.30... in the smoking room for the instruction of all who cared to listen.”14 A month after Jack McCollough noted this entry on McMasters into his diary, Otira workers were on strike—without the blessing of union officials.[iv]

What about the rise of syndicalist tactics, or the revolutionary ideas of the FOL—an organisation that welded a significance influence on the labour movement of the day and featured prominently in its key conflicts? Vocal members of the FOL, such as the fiery Bob Semple, and Paddy Web, subscribed to the anarchist newspaper Freedom through Philip Josephs’ tailor shop-cum-infoshop. Indeed, mere months after his arrival in 1904, Josephs was stocking international anarchist material in copious amounts—from Freedom to Emma Goldman’s Mother Earth. Not only that, he was publishing revolutionary critiques of the labour laws of the day before they became popularised by the FOL.

Of course it is wrong to conclude that Josephs was the key factor in the rise of revolutionary rhetoric in New Zealand. There is no doubt that him and the various individuals across the country who identified as anarchists, form but a small part of the revolutionary upsurge that was the pre-1920 period. But it is not a stretch to say that he and his pamphlets contributed to it in some way. Josephs’ activity, and the actions of other anarchists like him, surely had a hand in the normalisation of syndicalist tactics and the ideology of direct action—an ideology that crystallised into one of New Zealand’s most fraught and revolutionary periods.

Josephs’ transnational diffusion of anarchist doctrine, his links to the wider anarchist movement, and his involvement with Freedom Press (through the distribution of their anarchist politics), ensured anarchist ideas and tactics received a hearing in the New Zealand labour movement well beyond its minority status. Despite Erik Olssen’s suggestion that “few rank and file revolutionaries had much knowledge of syndicalist and anarchist ideology,” it is clear that anarchism—alongside other shades of socialist thought—contributed to the militancy of the movement on a scale not readily recognised by most historical accounts.[v] Likewise, Josephs’ activity places him, and New Zealand anarchism, firmly on the global anarchist map. While the two anarchist collectives that were formed in 1913—an Auckland group and the Wellington Freedom Group—were no Federación Anarquista Ibérica (Iberian Anarchist Federation), the fact that anarchists came together, formed collectives, and propagated the principles of anarchism, at the very least, deserves remembering.[vi]

The point of these examples is not some kind of shallow cry for attention on the part of anarchist historiography. As noted earlier, these past actions and ideas—of which today’s anarchist movement currently forms a part—stand as examples of alternative forms of struggle. They highlight the possibility of other possibilities, and form a continuum of practice that ground the work of today’s anarchists in a rich vein of radical history.

That said, capital and the struggle against it has changed considerably since the times of Philip Josephs and the Wellington Freedom Group. As Endnotes points out, “the ‘twentieth century’... its contours of class relations, its temporality of progress, and its post-capitalist horizons, is obviously behind us.”[vii] Yet the anarchist activity and the syndicalist surge of the early twentieth century serve as pertinent reminders of the successes (and failures) of New Zealand’s anarchist movement. If history is to be more than a nostalgic stroll through the past, and if the historian’s responsibility “is to find those social processes and structures which promise an alternative to the ones now dominant,” then awareness of New Zealand’s anarchist tradition should serve as “a key reminder that we still live in a society deeply divided by class. The actions of the past stand as inspiring, yet unfinished movements.”[viii]

ENDNOTES[i]Marlborough Express, 16 November 1907. [ii] Kerry Taylor, “Cases of the Revolutionary Left and the Waterside Workers’ Union,” in Melanie Nolan (ed.), Revolution: The 1913 Great Strike in New Zealand, Canterbury University Press, 2005, p. 203. [iii] Ibid., pp. 203–204. 14 “12 June 1908,” McCullough Diary vol 1, McCullough papers, Canterbury Museum Library, Christchurch. [iv]Marlborough Express, 25 July 1908. [v] Eric Olssen, The Red Feds: Revolutionary Industrial Unionism and the New Zealand Federation of Labor 1908–1913, Oxford University Press, 1988, p. 86. [vi] Formed in 1927, the FAI was a large and influential anarchist federation that included affinity groups spread across the Iberian Peninsula. It played a major role in the Spanish union movement, as well as the Spanish Revolution of 1936. See Stuart Christie, We, the Anarchists! A Study of the Iberian Anarchist Federation (FAI) 1927–1937, AK Press, 2008. [vii]Endnotes 1: Preliminary Materials for a Balance Sheet of the Twentieth Century, 2008, p. 3. [viii] Jeremy Breecher, Strike! The True History of Mass Insurrection in America from 1877 to the Present—as authentic revolutionary movements against the establishments of state, capital and trade unionism, Straight Arrow Books, 1972, p. 319; Nicholas Lampert, “Struggles at Haymarket: An Embattled History of Static Monuments and Public Interventions” in Josh MacPhee & Eric Ruin (eds.), Realizing the Impossible: Art Against Authority, AK Press, 2007, p. 255.

Thursday, September 19, 2013

In the windswept cemetery of rural Geraldine stands the headstone of
Johann Sebastian Trunk, a German cabinet-maker, militant anarchist and
advocate of making the world anew—violently if necessary. The tidy
headstone betrays no indication of the radicalism once lived; indeed,
many anarchists in New Zealand, England or Germany would know little
more than the weekend adventurer scanning the concrete commemorations.
For despite the part Trunk played in the international anarchist
movement during its development in the 1870s to 1900s, little is known
about him—a fate shared by many comrades who, although integral to the
movement, have often been passed over for leading figures. Like the
headstone, his name is often inscribed among others but without any
further offerings of information.

As part of my own research on anarchism in New Zealand, I decided to check up a footnote in Frank Prebble’s ‘Troublemakers’ Anarchism and Syndicalism: The Early Years of the Libertarian Movement in Aotearoa/New Zealand:
“S Trunk, the militant German anarchist, previously in London, migrated
to New Zealand where his brother Lutjohann lived, and nothing more was
heard from him.” After tracking down other one-liners and piecing
together a family tree, I was able to make contact with Trunk’s
94-year-old granddaughter Joyce King, and other family members. I was
excited about the possibility of learning more on this mysterious
anarchist and possibly put a face to the name. But his anarchist
activities were a surprise to the family too. “We never, ever, heard a
whisper of anything of that,” recalled Joyce.

Who was Johann Sebastian Trunk? Was this transient and militant
anarchist active in the New Zealand labour movement? And how did he end
up in the South Island town of Geraldine—quite possibly the furtherist
place from the meccas of European anarchism one could get at the time?
What follows is a brief-but-nonetheless-needed biography of a
transnational anarchist whose activities are grounded in the tension and
conflicts of a movement coming of age.

Johann Sebastian Trunk was born on 1 November 1850 and grew up on a
family farm in Breitenbuch, Bavaria. Little information is known of his
time there, but family note that he was born a Roman Catholic and became
an apprentice cabinet-maker. The story handed down to Joyce and the
family was that to become fully certified in his trade, Trunk had to
work two months in another country: “from Germany he went to
Switzerland, from Switzerland he went to France, and while he was in
France, Germany got involved in a war with some other country and he
high-tailed it to London.”

The reality is only half true. Germany during the second half of the
nineteenth century was home to a burgeoning socialist movement,
personified by the German Social Democratic Party and the growth of
numerous labour unions. Under the umbrella of ‘social democrat’ fell
various tenets of socialist thought trying to find its feet—from those
who believed in gradualism and parliamentary change, to
pro-revolutionary, proto-anarchist advocates. For example, a number of
social democrats like the fiery Johann Most, were becoming disillusioned
with parliamentary politics and advocating more insurrectionary means
to bring about social revolution. Support for revolutionary change was
increasing in the German socialist movement, and Trunk was one such
advocate.

A paragraph or two on Johann Most is necessary, as his political
journey typifies that of Johann Trunk and many other
socialists-cum-anarchists of the period. Born into a life of poverty,
abuse and toil, Most drifted across the German empire as a bookbinder
until finding socialism. He then dived into a number of editorial roles
with instant success—saving fledging socialist newspapers with a
rhetoric that fell on fertile ground. Despite his growing radicalism
being suppressed by numerous stints in prison, Most was elected into
parliament as a social democrat in 1874, a position of relative immunity
held until exiled by the German government in 1878. A captivating and
powerful orator, Most used the public platform to popularise his
increasingly revolutionary views across Germany (and beyond).

The more time spent in parliament, the more radical his views became.
Although he never committed such acts, Most helped to popularise
‘propaganda of the deed’—the insurrectionary use of violence against
monarchs, state officials or employers in order to rouse the masses into
revolutionary action, and to set right the daily wrongs of capitalist
violence and exploitation. Terrorism to its detractors, propaganda by
the deed became rife across Europe from the mid 1870s and for a time was
uncritically adopted by many anarchists and other revolutionaries.
Most’s rejection of parliamentary and legalist methods for spectacular
direct action found his ideas edging closer to such an anarchist
position—one he would associate with during his years in London and the
Unites States.

Like Most, and as told to his family, Trunk did leave Germany in
1878. However, he left as both an apprentice cabinet-maker and a victim
of Otto von Bismarck’s anti-socialist laws. “Under the law,” writes
Gultsman in The German Social Democratic Party 1975-1933,
“all socialist organization and agitation was prohibited… the
distribution and publication of socialist literature was outlawed and in
areas of strong socialist sentiment or on the suspicions of illegal
activity the police were empowered to impose a ‘minor stage of siege’
under which persons could be made to leave the area.” According to
contemporary anarchist historian and archivist Max Nettlau, Trunk was
active in the socialist movement from the early 1870s onwards, and in
all likelihood was in the Social Democratic Party. As a result, and
alongside over 900 expelled socialists, Trunk left German repression for
less hostile shores.

Amongst the “cacophony of foreign voices, and only the lurking
presence of spies to remind the political refugees of their troubles
back home,” Trunk found himself in the “most fecund source of banned
works of literature, history or philosophy”—Switzerland.[1] A relative
sanctuary for revolutionaries of all shades, Switzerland was then
flourishing in the smuggling of revolutionary newspapers from centres
like Paris and London. Paris was an important dissemination point for
Most’s own newspaper (and home to Victor Dave, an anarchist with whom
Trunk would later form a working relationship with). Trunk may have had a
hand in this transnational anarchist network, for Nettlau believed that
Trunk had written articles for the Swiss Berner Arbeiter Zeitung
(Bern Workers Paper).[2] And like Dave, who was expelled from France in
March 1880, Trunk also ended up in London via Paris. Hermia Oliver in The International Anarchist Movement in Late Victorian London
notes, “among the crowd of refugee socialists in London were also a
German joiner, Sebastian Trunk (deported from France in 1880, who was
described as very close to Most).”[3] It appears that apprenticeship of a
different kind—as an anarchist revolutionary—was the real reason for
Trunk’s high tailing across the Atlantic.

The fugitives from Germany added an increasingly radical voice to the
larger socialist community taking shape in London. This community often
centred around the Social Democratic Club on Rose Street, Soho Square
West, formed in 1877 by German expatriates in London “exasperated by the
internal disputes within the Communistischer Arbeiter Bildungs Verein
(Communist Workers’ Educational Society-CABV).” The new Club had five
sections of various nationalities, including German and English
sections—baptised in the midst of a lengthy stonemason’s strike.[4]

As well as being “packed to the brim with poor working class people,”
the Rose Street tenement served as a landing point for foreign
revolutionaries. As Mathew Thomas in his study of anarchist
counter-cultures in Britain notes, “anyone visiting Rose Street would
have encountered the European revolutionary world in miniature; its
thought, atmosphere and ethos. Such visitors would have witnesses
polemical debates about the aims and means of socialism and anarchism.”

Adding his vivacious voice to the debates was Johann Most, “who was
received with open arms by the [CABV]. They backed Most financially in
the founding of a newspaper, Freiheit.”[5]
Johann Trunk, presumably fresh from his French deportation, “soon
joined forces with Most,” cementing a relationship that would be as
fraught as it was long. As a member of the Freiheit
collective Trunk mixed his labour with the clutter that was its office;
newspapers, type and presses strewn amongst furniture and bottles of
beer. “Today Freiheit is what it
should be. A newspaper that is completely for the revolutionary worker,”
wrote Trunk in November 1881, pleased with the direction Freiheit and his comrades were taking.

However the British state was not, thanks to increasing pressure from
Bismarck and other foreign representatives wanting to achieve in London
what they had failed to do at home. On 30 March 1881 Most was arrested
and sentenced to sixteen months hard labour, after applauding the
assassination of Tsar Alexander II as “sterling propaganda-by-the-deed”
and thundering for similar acts to continue, “until the last tyrant, the
last plutocrat, and the last priest are dead.”[6] Yet his imprisonment
simply inspired his followers and gave the nascent anarchist community
in London a cause to rally behind. Comrades like Trunk, Frank Kitz and
Johann Neve ensured that Freiheit
presses continued to run hot, with sales jumping from 3 to 100 per
week. Defence committees were formed at Rose Street by the English
section of the CABV, organising protests, publishing an English-language
Freiheit, and issuing scathing manifesto’s.

Despite ongoing harassment by police, Freiheit continued
with interim editors and a rotating team of typesetters. However the
paper’s celebration of the assassination of Lord Cavendish and Thomas
Burke by Fenian revolutionaries in Dublin was a step too far for the
authorities. Its description of their deaths as “a heroically bold act
of popular justice” annihilating “the evil representatives of a
malignant government based on brute force,” saw Freiheit falter under the weight of further police raids.[7]

With Most stewing in a London jail cell and Neve fleeing from persecution, Trunk boldly stepped into the hot seat, editing Freiheit
from 20 May to 3 June 1882. Trunk and others also kept up spirits by
“issuing fiery broadsheets designed to ‘prove to comrades far and near,
that we are still there, and in no way prepared to throw our rifles in
the corn’: but to no avail.”[8] Printers brave enough to run the
presses were not forthcoming and Freiheit was moved to Paris, then Switzerland, never to be printed in London again.

Mandate for Trunk and Neve, delegates representing the CABV at the 1881 London Social Revolutionary Congress. IISH

During this period Trunk was also involved in other anarchist
developments in London. In 1881 he, alongside 6 others, was the organising secretary for
London Social Revolutionary Congress held in July, and attended with Johann Neve as
delegate for the CABV. They were mandated to "stick with the strict principles of our club (ie. communist revolution) and to fight any compromise by the parliamentary social-democrats from Zurich." Among the 45 delegates present to further
organised anarchism were key figures such as Peter Kropotkin and Louise
Michel. Trunk, alongside Neve and the Italian anarchist Errico
Malatesta, was elected to an International Committee created to maintain
anarchist relations after the congress.

In June 1885, Trunk was among other German anarchists who helped form
a North London branch of the Socialist League (SL). William Morris,
influential textile designer and a key member of the League, mentions
him in his diary: “I doubt if, except one or two Germans, etc, we have
any real anarchists amongst us.” This would change over time as the
Socialist League, and its paper The Commonweal,
moved towards an overtly anarchist potion. As E P Thompson notes,
anarchist influence in the SL reached its climax in November 1888 when
Lucy Parsons, militant anarchist and widow of Chicago Martyr, Albert
Parsons, addressed a series of commemorative meetings organised by the
League. With Parsons and Kropotkin, Trunk also shared the platform on
the speaking tour.

It appears Trunk, active as he was in the English anarchist scene,
was also involved in the blossoming Jewish anarchist movement. “In
February 1885,” notes Rudolf Rocker in The London Years,
“the radical movement among the East End Jewish workers started a club
in Berner Street… this club was for years the centre of propaganda and
social life among the Jewish comrades.” According to Rocker’s memoir,
Trunk was regular and welcome guest at the Club.

However Trunk and his fellow German anarchists were soon engulfed in
an intense and bitter dispute know as the Bruderkreig, or Brothers War,
which had been simmering since 1884. This complex split in the German
movement was based on ideological positions, competing newspapers, and
strong personalities, and was further clouded by the involvement of
police spies.

In February 1887, Johann Neve was arrested by Belgian police while
smuggling anarchist newspapers into Germany. As Andrew Carlson explains
in Anarchism in Germany, “it was a
route that Berlin police wanted to smash, and Neve was a person they
wanted to imprison, but it took them several years of work and the
assistance of several police spies before they were able to achieve
these two goals.” After being thrown in a German jail, Neve wrote to
Trunk that he had carved the date 1902 into his cell door—the year it
would swing open and grant him freedom. It was the last letter anyone in
the movement ever received from Neve, who died in police custody in
1896.

Neve’s imprisonment turned the anarchist’s political and literary
debate into one of outright war. Accusations that Neve had fallen victim
to a spy plot were rife, and friends quickly became enemies. Trunk
initially found himself on the side of his Freiheit
comrades such as Victor Dave—‘collectivists’ who were sometimes at odds with anarchist communists like
Josef Peukert and the Die Autonomie
group. However
Trunk—despite hiring a private investigator to determine where the Autonomie
group’s money was coming from—later joined forces with Peukert and the
group. He cited Dave’s overbearing and tyrannical behaviour as the
reason for his defection.[9]

Trunk’s move to anarchist communism ensured he continued to be active
in London’s radical counter-culture. In March 1891 he spoke alongside
John Turner, Michel, Malatesta and Kropotkin at a London meeting
commemorating the twentieth anniversary of the Paris Commune. American anarchist Emma Goldman also visited him in 1900—his house
being a distribution point for leaflets, handbills, posters (and people)
from around the globe.

Daisy, Johann and Johanne, possibly before heading to New Zealand

Yet it was Trunk who was soon to be shipping out. At 56 years of age,
and after personifying the development of anarchism in London, Johann
left Europe for New Zealand in 1906. Trunk’s brother-in-law, Johannes
Lutjohann, had already migrated to Christchurch and set up the billiards
table company Lutjohann and Co. Being a skilled cabinet-maker, Trunk
had been asked to join the company. Johann, his wife Johanne, and
daughter Daisy, soon met them in Christchurch. Not long after, the
company won a gold medal at the New Zealand International Exhibition for
a patent dinning-room billiard-table (which are now highly
sought-after).

Although Trunk was naturalised as a British subject in October 1908,
when the First World War broke out his German background (and age) meant
work was hard to find. The family decided to sell up, pool their money,
and purchase a farm. With his carpentry tools in tow, Trunk and the
extended family moved 140 km south to Geraldine. He contributed what
labour he could: “He was too old to do any of the farm work,” remembers
Joyce King, “so he took on the vegetable garden. He had beautiful
gardens, nice and tidy, very neat. That would have come out of his
cabinet making.” She recalls fondly that Trunk would take her to school
in a horse and gig, a far cry from the metropolitan London he had left
behind.

Indeed, little is known about this revolutionary’s activity in the
antipodes. It does not appear that Trunk was visibly active in the local
labour movement, despite some interesting family connections. Also
working at Lutjohann and Co. was another brother-in-law, Frederick
Schmidt (Smith), a socialist and avid reader of Marx. Frederick’s
grandson Robert Smith was on the executive committee of the Christchurch
Tramway Employees Union, and an active participant in the 1932 tramways
strike. Yet Trunk seems to have left his advocacy of propaganda by the
deed to days past. Having been involved in many of anarchism’s pivotal
milestones, who could argue against limiting his plotting to that of the
vegetable kind? After spending his final years in Geraldine, Johann
Sebastian Trunk died on 4 June 1933, aged eighty-three—without an
anarchist obituary but rich in transnational anarchist experience.

Many thanks are due to the family of Johann Trunk for their generosity and time, and for supplying the images above. Thanks also to Martin Veith, Barry Pateman, David Berry and Constance Bantman.

ENDNOTES[1] Alex Butterworth, The World That Never Was: A True Story of Dreamers, Schemers, Anarchists, and Secret Agents, Pantheon, 2010, p.58.
[2] Max Nettlau, Geschicte der Anarchie. I owe many thanks to Martin Veith for accessing and translating hard-to-find German-language texts on my behalf.
[3] Hermia Oliver, The International Anarchist Movement in Late Victorian London, Croom Helm, 1983.
[4] Nick Heath, ‘Neve, John, 1844-1896’, available online at http://libcom.org/history/neve-john-1844-1896
[5] Andrew Carlson, Anarchism in Germany: Vol, 1: The Early Movement, Scarecrow Press, 1972, p.182.
[6] Frederick Trautmann, The Voice of Terror: A Biography of Johann Most, Green Press, 1980, p.45.
[7] Trautmann, p.70.
[8] Bernard Porter, ‘The Freiheit Prosecutions, 1881-1882’ in The Historical Journal, 23(4), p.854.
[9] During my research for Sewing Freedom
I located a lengthy text on Victor Dave and the Brothers War, written
by Trunk. The text is in old-style German and awaits a keen translator
to shed further light on the conflict.

Saturday, September 14, 2013

‘Denying authority’ is an article on Philip Josephs recently published in Working Life: PSA Journal (September 2013). You can download the edition for free from the link above (the article is on page 30).